(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.02.13 2017가단53275

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.02.13 2017가단53275

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) completed the registration of ownership transfer on each real estate listed in the separate sheet on July 6, 1985.

B. The Deceased, as his child between D (Judicial Declaration of Disappearance) and D, had E, F, Plaintiff, and Defendant, and died on December 5, 200.

C. On July 9, 2014, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on inheritance by consultation and division on December 5, 200 with respect to each real estate stated in the separate sheet.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of evidence A from 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. When the Plaintiff’s assertion died, the heir, including the Plaintiff and the Defendant, agreed on the division of the inherited property to be owned by the Plaintiff, and the remaining real estate was owned by the Defendant solely.

Nevertheless, since the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant over the scope of delegation received from the plaintiff and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer based on the restoration of real name.

B. It is not sufficient to acknowledge that the deceased’s heir’s heir made an agreement on the division of inherited property with the content of the Plaintiff’s ownership, solely on the basis of each description of evidence Nos. 7 and 13 and each testimony of evidence Nos. 7 and 13, E and F, and there is no other evidence to

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the plaintiff's assertion.

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiff 1's assertion of the parties did not hold an agreement on the division of inherited property with the purport that the defendant and the defendant own all of the real estate stated in the separate sheet, but the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the inheritance due to the division. Thus, the defendant has the reason for the recovery of the title of registration with respect to the 1/4 shares of the plaintiff's inheritance among each real estate

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.02.07 2016가합560136

-서울고등법원 2018.10.17 2018나2014944

-부산지방법원동부지원 2015.10.06 2015가단202737

-창원지방법원통영지원 2019.01.08 2017가단27104

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.01.15 2015가단73619